GEOMETRY OF TIME AND DIMENSIONALITY OF SPACE

M. SANIGA
International Solvay Institutes for Physics and Chemistry, ULB,
Campus Plaine, CP231, Blvd du Triomphe, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
&
Astronomical Institute of the Slovak Academy of Sciences,
05960 Tatransk Lomnica, Slovak Republic

1. Introduction

It goes without saying that a profound mystery lies behind the conventional notions of
space and time. Thus, for example, the fact that there are three macroscopic dimensions of
space was rigorously proved as early as the great Ptolemy some thousand years ago, yet
contemporary science is still lacking any deeper and theoretically well-founded insight into
the origin of this puzzling number. Deeper than the enigma of (the dimensionality of) space
seems to be that of (the nature of) time. Here, there even exists a sharp contradiction
between the way we perceive time and what modern physical theories tell us about the
concept. To our senses, time appears to flow, pass, proceed inexorably from the past
through (the unique moment of) the present into the future the fact commonly known as
the arrow of time. Yet, almost all the fundamental equations of physics are strictly time-
reversible and, in addition, they do not leave any proper place for the concept of the
present, the now. This failure of current physical theories to properly account for the
observed macroscopic dimensionality of space and the intricate nature of time is, in our
opinion, asking for a serious revision of the generally adopted physical paradigms about the
concepts in question. We think that there is a strong need for the representation of space
and time that is more adherent to our perceptions and which includes, in particular, the
irreversibility of change.
Modern theoretical physics has entered the territory of scientific inquiry that lies so far
from ordinary experience that there exists no rigorous observational/ experimental guide to
be followed. The only means physicists have at hand to navigate through this region is mere
appeal of abstract and often counter-intuitive mathematical principles. Yet, sticking to
mathematical beauty alone may not necessarily be a proper path leading to a discovery of
new, more fundamental physical laws. For the history of science, and physics in particular,
teaches us a very important lesson that novel, revolutionary ideas and paradigm shifts were
almost always preceded and accompanied by new evidence from observations and
experiments that had accumulated over particular periods. So why not to listen to this
lesson again? This is precisely the strategy we adopted some fifteen years ago, soon after
we became familiar with a fascinating and extremely thought-provoking topic of
psychopathology of space and time the latter being a generic term for all peculiar, or
abnormal, perceptions of space and time as invariably reported by people suffering
serious mental psychoses as well as by other subjects experiencing so-called altered
 2

states of consciousness [114]. Over the years, a vast body of literature has accumulated on
the topic (see references in [2123]) so that there can already be seen a definite pattern in
the qualitative structure of these pathological space-time constructs. Already in the normal
state of health there are, every now and then, aberrations of subjective time such as
acceleration or deceleration of the lapse of time. Under severe mental disturbances these
anomalies/peculiarities become more pronounced. The flux of time may even cease
completely (the sensations usually described as time standing still, or suspended,
arrested time), or expand without limit (the feelings of everlasting now, eternity). In
some cases, times flow may be experienced as discontinuous, fragmented or even
reversing its direction. Finally, in most extreme cases, time as a dimension is transcended,
or simply non-existent (atemporal, timeless states). The sense of space is likewise
powerfully affected. Space can appear amplified or compressed, condensed or
rarefied, or even changing its dimensionality; it can, for example, become just two
dimensional (flat), acquire another dimensions, or be simply reduced to a dimensionless
point in consciousness.
Obviously, it would be an utterly hopeless task if we tried to explain these fascinating
space-time constructs in terms of physics. Hence, a conceptually new framework is
required to handle these phenomena. Some years ago we put forward a theory that seems to
be very promising in this respect [1523]. This pencil theory was originally motivated by
and aimed at a deeper insight into the puzzling discrepancy between perceptional and
physical aspects of time. Yet, we soon realized that it also has an important bearing on the
problem of the dimensionality of space. Namely, we found out that there seems to exist an
intricate relation between our sense of time and the observed number of spatial dimensions
[15,17,21,22]. Mathematically, this property is substantiated by the fact that we treat time
and space from the very beginning as standing on topologically different footings. As for
their outer appearance, both the types of dimension are identical, being regarded as
pencils, i.e. linear, single-infinite aggregates of constituting elements. It is their inner
structure where the difference comes in: the constituting element (point) of a spatial
dimension is a line, whereas that of the time dimension is a (proper) conic.
The algebraic geometrical setting of our debut theory was a projective plane. The theory
acquired a qualitatively new standing when we raised the dimensionality of the setting by
one, i.e. moved into a projective space, and identified the pencils in question with those of
the fundamental configurations of certain Cremona transformations [2426]. The 3+1
macroscopic dimensionality of space-time was demonstrated to uniquely follow from the
structure of the so-called quadro-cubic Cremona transformations the simplest non-trivial,
non-symmetrical Cremona transformations in a projective space of three dimensions
[24,25]. In addition, these transformations were also found to fix the type of the pencil of
fundamental conics, i.e. the geometry of the time dimension, and to provide us with a
promising conceptual basis for eventual reconciliation between two extreme views of
space-time, viz. physical and psychological.
The paper gives a succinct exposition of this generalized theory. After introducing its
fundamental postulates and highlighting essentials of space Cremona transformations, we
review basic properties of the corresponding Cremonian space-times, stressing
particularly those items where the departure from generally accepted views/paradigms is
substantial. The presentation is rather non-technical, with the hope of being accessible to
scientists of various disciplines and diverse mathematical background. The reader who
wishes to go deeper into the mathematical formalism employed is referred to our papers
[17,24,25].
 3

2. Cremonian (Pencil-)Space-Times

Let us consider two distinct, incident lines in a projective space. These define a unique
plane (they both share) and a unique point (their intersection).1 The two lines define also a
unique pencil of lines, i.e. the linear, single-infinite set of lines lying in the plane and
passing through the point. It is our first fundamental postulate that each of the observed
dimensions of space is isomorphic to a pencil of lines [1517]. Next, let us take a plane
and two distinct conics lying in it. These define a unique pencil of conics, i.e. the linear,
single-parametrical aggregate of conics confined to the plane and passing through the
points shared by the two conics (called the base points of the pencil). Our second basic
postulate is that the structure of the time dimension is identical to that of a specific pencil of
conics, each proper conic standing for a single event [1517]. As any two coplanar lines
have always one, and only one, point in common, there exists only one projective type of a
pencil of lines. A different situation is encountered in the case of conics pencils as two
different conics situated in the same (projective) plane have four points in common, of
which some (or all) may coincide, or be pair-wise imaginary: in the case where all the
points are real we find as many as five projectively distinct types of pencil of conics as
illustrated in Figure 1. So, in our pencil-approach space has a simpler (less complex)
structure than time a feature conforming nicely to our sensual perception.

Figure 1. The five projectively distinct types of pencil of conics in the case where all the base points are real: a
all the four points distinct; b two points distinct, one double; c two distinct points, each of multiplicity two; d
one single and one triple point; e one point of multiplicity four.

Clearly, any pencil of lines may serve as a potential spatial dimension and, similarly, any
pencil of conics can be taken to represent the time dimension. Our pencil space-time is thus
originally infinite-dimensional and lacking any definite link between time and space. We
therefore need a mechanism that would, on the one side, break this symmetry down to what

1
The terminology, symbols and notation used here are the same as in [17] and [24].
 4

we really observe and, on the other, induce a unique coupling between the two kinds of
dimension. It is here where Cremona transformations are invoked to do the job [2426].
A space Cremona transformation is a one-to-one (birational) correspondence between the
points of two projective spaces [24,27,28]. The transformation is determined in all
essentials by giving, in either space, a homaloidal web of surfaces, i.e. a linear, triple-
infinite family of rational surfaces of which any three members have only one free
(variable) intersection; these homaloidal surfaces are mapped by the transformation into the
planes of the other space. The character of a homaloidal web is completely specified by the
properties of its base configuration, that is, by the set of points that are common to every
member of the web. A base point is an exceptional element of the web in the sense that it
makes the equations of the corresponding Cremona transformation illusory. Its image
(homologue) in the other space is thus not a single point, but a locus, either a curve or a
surface, called the fundamental element; it is the totality of these, the fundamental
configuration, whose structure turns out to be of paramount importance.
To clarify and substantiate the point just made, let us have a look at the structure of such
a configuration for the simplest among asymmetrical space Cremona transformations the
transformation generated, in one of the spaces, by a homaloidal web of quadratic surfaces
(quadrics) whose base manifold consists of a real line, B, and three distinct, non-collinear
real points Bk (k=1,2,3), none being incident with the line in question [24,27,28]. It is an
utterly amazing thing to see that this fundamental configuration comprises just three pencils
of lines, viz. the ones located in the planes BkB and centered at the points Bk, and just one
pencil of conics, that situated in the plane B1B2B3 and having for the base points the three
points Bk and the point L at which the line B meets the plane in question as depicted in
Figure 2, left.

Figure 2. A schematic sketch of (the relation between) the structure of the fundamental configuration of the
homaloidal web of quadrics featuring a real base line and three distinct real base points (left) and that of the base
configuration of the associated web of ruled cubic surfaces (right). The symbols and notation are given in the text.
 5

So, there can be nothing more natural than assuming that the space-time as perceived by
our senses has the structure of the above described fundamental configuration: since once
adopting this tenet, we have a nice explanation not only why it features four macroscopic
dimensions (four fundamental pencils), but also why three of them (spatial, generated by
pencils of lines) are of a qualitatively different nature than the remaining one (time,
represented by a pencil of conics) [24]. However, it is not only the right number of macro-
dimensions and their correct ratio that stem naturally from this picture. It is also a definite
coupling between spatial dimensions and time, as envisaged above. For the vertices of the
three fundamental lines pencils (Bk) not only define the plane of location of the
fundamental conics, but, together with the point L, they also uniquely specify the type of
their pencil, i.e. the extrinsic geometry of the time dimension. As this coupling between
time and space represents a considerable departure from that based on relativity theory, we
shall examine it in more detail later on, when the reader is more acquainted with the
approach.
The picture just outlined is obviously only one side of the coin for we cannot ignore the
role played by the image of the fundamental configuration in the second (primed)
projective space, i.e. by the base configuration of the associated homaloidal web of
surfaces. As shown in detail in [24,27,28], this inverse homaloidal web consists of surfaces
of the third degree (cubics). The cubics are ruled, i.e. each contains a single-infinity of
lines, and have in common four lines: three of them, k (k=1,2,3), are mutually skew
(disjoint), whereas the fourth one, D, is incident with each of the three as portrayed in
Figure 2, right.2 Not only does the line D stand apart from the lines k, being their
common transversal, but it also differs from them in another crucial aspect: it is singular
(double) for every cubic of the web, whilst the other three lines are ordinary (simple).
Although not pronounced to such a degree as in the fundamental configuration, a three-to-
one splitting is thus inherent also in the structure of the base system of the inverse web.
That this must be so is not difficult to understand because (as also elucidated in Figure 2)
the fundamental lines of the pencils in BkB correspond to the points of the lines k,
respectively, and the fundamental conics in the plane B1B2B3 answer to the points of the
remaining line, D [24,27,28]. We must therefore regard the base configuration of the web
of cubics as another viable representation of space-time, in no way less prominent than the
previous one. Our daring hypothesis is that this configuration underlies qualitatively the
physical conception of space-time [24]. A principal justification for such a claim goes as
follows. From a general relativists point of view, there is no distinction between time and
space as far as their internal structure is concerned; the only difference between the two is
embodied in the (Lorentz) signature of the metric tensor on the underlying differentiable
manifold. And this is indeed very similar to what our base space-time exhibits, as all the
four dimensions are there represented by lines; yet, the time coordinate, represented by D,
has apparently a different standing than the three dimensions of space, generated by the
lines k, k=1,2,3.
We have thus found two non-equivalent, yet robust on their own, Cremonian views of
the macroscopic spatio-temporal fabric [24]. One, based on the properties of the
fundamental configuration of the specific homaloidal web of quadrics (Figure 2, left), is

2
The four lines lie on a unique quadric (represented in Figure 2 as a hyperboloid of one sheet).
 6

characterized by a more pronounced difference between the spatial dimensions and time
and, therefore, more appropriate when dealing with space-time as imprinted in our
consciousness (the subjective view). The other, grounded in the structure of the base
configuration of the associated web of cubics (Figure 2, right), features a less marked
distinction between the spatial dimensions and time and is, so, more akin to the physical
picture of space-time (the objective view). The two representations are intricately linked
to each other, the link being mediated by the particular type of Cremona transformation, the
one that sends the quadrics of the web in question into the planes of the other space. This
transformation is algebraically elegant and geometrically simple [24,27,28], and may thus
offer extraordinary promise for being an important initial stepping-stone towards bridging
the gap between two crucial, but so far so poorly reconciled, fields of the scientific inquiry,
viz. physics and psychology.
After demonstrating that the correct macroscopic dimensionality (4) and signature (3+1)
of the Universe are both crucial characteristics of our Cremonian space-times, we now
proceed, as promised, to have a closer look at how the three spatial pencil-dimensions are
coupled to the time pencil-coordinate. The best way to illustrate this point is to return to the
generic homaloidal web of quadrics and see what happens if, for example, one of the
isolated base points, say B3, approaches the base line B until the two get ultimately
incident. As shown in detail in [25], the resulting fundamental configuration still comprises
three distinct pencils of lines and a single pencil of conics: however, one of the pencils of
lines now incorporates the base line B (that centered at the point B3, and henceforth called
extraordinary), and stands thus slightly apart from the other two (ordinary), which do
not see Figure 3, left. In the other space, this asymmetry answers to the fact that two of
the three simple base lines (1 and 2) meet each other, while the third one (3) is skew
with either see Figure 3, right.

Figure 3. An illustrative sketch of the fundamental configuration of a homaloidal web of quadrics sharing a real
base line and three isolated base points of which one (B3) falls on the line in question (left) and the base
configuration of the inverse homaloidal web of cubics (right). The symbols are identical to those of the previous
figure.
 7

The corresponding Cremonian space-times thus both exhibit an intriguing anisotropy

among the spatial dimensions, where one dimension has a slightly different footing than the
other two. It is, however, the fundamental (subjective) representation where this spatial
anisotropy has not only a more pronounced character, but is also accompanied by a
qualitative change in the extrinsic geometry of the time dimension: for, as easily discernible
from the comparison of the left-hand sides of Figures 2 and 3, the pencil of fundamental
conics in the generic case is of the type a of Figure 1, whereas that in this particular
degenerate case is of the type b (as B3L here).
A brief inspection of some other degenerate cases [27,29] reveals further subtleties of this
fascinating relation. Thus, the same type of time dimension (b) is found also in the case
when two of the base points coalesce, not on B; space now featuring only two dimensions,
both being ordinary. The c type of time coordinate is encountered if one of the base
points lies on B and the other two coincide, off the latter; space again endowed with a
couple of dimensions one ordinary, one extraordinary. The dimensionality of space is
further reduced if all the three base points merge, the single spatial coordinate being
ordinary or extraordinary and time converted into the type d or e according as the
merger lies off or on the line B, respectively. The time dimension can even disappear, as
in the case when two of the base points fall on B; space, remarkably, retains here its three
dimensions, of which two are extraordinary.3 These examples suffice to see that a profound
connection between the global structure of time dimension and the number, as well as
individual character, of spatial coordinates is an essential element of the structure of our
Cremonian pencil-space-times. It is this property that finds its most distinguished and
almost ubiquitous manifestations in the already-mentioned realm of the psychopathology of
time and space [114,2123]. However, from what we found above it stems that this must
also be a feature pertaining to the structure of the physical universe, although in this case its
traits are obviously of a much subtler nature, being essentially embodied in a possible
delicate non-equivalence among the spatial dimensions themselves (compare the right-hand
sides of Figures 2 and 3). And although so far successfully evading any experimental,
observational evidence, this fact deserves at least serious theoretical attention, especially
given recent trends in quests for a theory of everything [30]. For in addition to invoking
compactified extra dimensions of space to get a sufficiently extended setting for the
ultimate unification of all the known types of interaction, we think it is worth revisiting and
having a fresh look at (the relation among) their three classical, infinitely-stretched-out
relatives, available to our senses.
The final task that remains to be done concerns the intrinsic structure of the pencil time
dimension. This structure has to conform to our experience of time as consisting of three
qualitatively different kinds of event, viz. the past, present and future. Yet, our pencil-time
is so far homogeneous, because all proper conics are projectively equivalent. We therefore
need to de-homogenize the pencil to yield the structure required. In light of the strategy
pursued in our planar model [1523], one of the simplest ways of doing so is to select, in
the unprimed projective space, one line, *, and attach to it a special status. It is an easy
exercise to see that if this line is in a general position, it will cut each of the four
fundamental planes in a point which does not coincide with any of the base points Bk

3
The interested reader may try to extend this analysis to all the remaining degenerate cases, whose complete list
and basic group-geometrical description can be found in [29].
 8

(k=1,2,3) and lies off B as well. Hence, the line * will be incident with a unique line
from each of the three fundamental pencils in BkB (k=1,2,3) and a unique, in general
proper, conic of the fundamental pencil in the plane B1B2B3 as depicted in Figure 4.
But as for the pencil of fundamental conics, and so time, there is indeed more than meets
the eye. For the point at which * meets the plane in question separates the proper conics
of the pencil into two disjoint, qualitatively distinct families. One family consists of those
conics for which this point is external (ex-conics), while the other family comprises the
conics having this point in their interior (in-conics); the two sets are separated from each
other by a unique proper conic, the one that incorporates the point (the on-conic the
conic drawn bold in Figure 4). This structure is seen to be perfectly compatible with what
Nature offers to our senses after we identify the ex-conics with the past events, the in-
conics with the events of the future, and the unique on-conic with the moment of the
present, the now. It is evident that nothing similar takes place inside a(ny) pencil of lines,
because there are no such notions as external and/or internal for a point with respect to a
line. So, our spatial pencil-dimensions retain their homogeneity, as observed.

Figure 4. A generic line of the projective space, *, is incident with three unique, mutually skew, fundamental
lines (one from each pencil) and a unique fundamental conic (all the four objects drawn bold).

It is important here to realize that it is only after introducing this standing-out line when
the distinction between time and space acquires its desirable, observed form. A natural
question emerges: what is the meaning of this special line? We think that the existence of
such a line may simply be understood as a possible representation of the observer. It then
follows that if there is no observer, there is no here and there is no present, past and
future either. The converse, however, is not true! That is, there do exist observers that are
not (fully) localized in space and whose time dimension exhibits a completely different
internal structure. As the attentive reader may already have noticed, this has to correspond
to the cases where the line * has a particular position with respect to the points Bk and/or
 9

the line B, or lies completely in one of the fundamental planes. To illustrate the point,
let us consider the case where * passes via one of the base points, say B1, being skew with
B and not lying in the plane B1B2B3. It is clear that in this case every fundamental conic is
the on-conic; so, for this particular observer there exists no past/future, all the events
pertaining solely to the present! Moreover, as B1 is the vertex of the pencil of fundamental
lines located in the plane B1B, this observer will also find himself/herself to be infinitely-
stretched-out along the corresponding spatial dimension! Astonishing? Or, rather, weird?
Yes, but even more so that this and plenty of even more bizarre, whimsical experiences of
space and time are so often found in the narratives of people who find themselves in a
profoundly altered state of consciousness and try to share their uncanny experiences with
others [114,2123]. To provide the reader with a sense of what such a strange space-
time experience looks like, we introduce the following fascinating account [31]:
I woke up in a whole different world in which the puzzle of the world was solved extremely easily in the form of a
different space. I was amazed at the wonder of this different space and this amazement concealed my judgement,
this space is totally distinct from the one we all know. It had different dimensions, everything contained everything
else. I was this space and this space was me. The outer space was a part of this space, I was in the outer space and
the outer space was in me...
Anyway, I didnt experience time, time of the outer space and eons until the second phase of this dream. In the
cosmic flow of time you saw worlds coming to existence, blooming like flowers, actually existing and then
disappearing. It was an endless game. If you looked back into the past, you saw eons, if you looked forward into
the future there were eons stretching into the eternity and this eternity was contained in the point of the present.
One was situated in a state of being in which the will-be and the vanishing were already included, and this
being was my consciousness. It contained it all...

3. Conclusion

Current science is most adept in addressing problems that require technique rather than
insight. Yet, when addressing the fundamental issues of the structure of space-time, it is
rather insight that matters. The above-outlined theory of Cremonian space-time(s) seems to
provide us with both, which is one of its strongest points. It not only offers us a feasible
explanation why the Universe features three spatial and one temporal dimension, but also
indicates unsuspected intricacies of the coupling between the two. Moreover, it also sheds
fresh light on how the physical view of space-time and its experiential counterpart can
possibly be interconnected. These properties alone are enough to realize that the theory
deserves further serious exploration.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the NATO Advanced Research Fellowship, distributed and
administered by the Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique, Belgium, and, in part, by
the NATO Collaborative Linkage Grant PST.CLG.976850. I would like to thank Mr. P.
Bendk for careful drawing of the figures. I am also grateful to my friends Prof. Mark
Stuckey (Elizabethtown College) for a careful proofreading of the paper and Dr. Rosolino
Buccheri (IFCAI, Palermo) for valuable comments.
 10

References

1. Jaspers, K. (1923) Allgemeine Psychopathologie, Springer, Berlin.

2. Minkowski, E. (1933) Le Temps Vcu tudes Phnomnologiques et Psychopathologiques, Gauthier, Paris.
3. Binswanger, L. (1933) Das Raumproblem in der Psychopathologie, Zeit. ges. Neurol. Psychiat. 145, 598648.
4. Israeli, N. (1932) The psychopathology of time, Psychol. Rev. 39, 486.
5. Schilder, P. (1936) Psychopathology of time, J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 83, 530546.
6. Schilder, P. (1936) Psychoanalyse des Raumes, Imago 22, 6180.
7. Scheller, H. (1957) Das Problem des Raumes in der Psychopathologie, Studium Generale 10, 563574.
8. Fischer, F. (1929) Zeitstruktur und Schizophrenie, Zeit. ges. Neurol. Psychiat. 121, 544574.
9. Fischer, F. (1930) Raum-Zeit-Struktur und Denkstrung in der Schizophrenie, Zeit. ges. Neurol. Psychiat.
124, 241256.
10. Melges, E.T. (1982) Time and the Inner Future: A Temporal Approach to Psychiatric Disorders, John Wiley
& Sons, New York.
11. Hartocollis, P. (1983) Time and Timelessness, or the Varieties of Temporal Experience, International
Universities Press, New York.
12. Tellenbach, H. (1956) Die Raumlichkeit der Melancholischen: I. Mitteilung, Nervenarzt 27, 1218.
13. Tellenbach, H. (1956) Die Raumlichkeit der Melancholischen: II. Mitteilung, Nervenarzt 27, 289298.
14. Lehmann, H.E. (1967) Time and psychopathology, Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 138, 798821.
15. Saniga, M. (1996) Arrow of time and spatial dimensions, in K. Sato, T. Suginohara, and N. Sugiyama (eds.),
Cosmological Constant and the Evolution of the Universe, Universal Academy Press Inc., Tokyo, pp. 283
284.
16. Saniga, M. (1996) On the transmutation and annihilation of pencil-generated space-time dimensions, in W.G.
Tifft and W.J. Cocke (eds.), Mathematical Models of Time and Their Application to Physics and Cosmology,
Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 283290.
17. Saniga, M. (1998) Pencils of conics: a means towards a deeper understanding of the arrow of time?, Chaos,
Solitons & Fractals 9, 10711086.
18. Saniga, M. (1998) Time arrows over ground fields of an uneven characteristic, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 9,
10871093.
19. Saniga, M. (1998) Temporal dimension over Galois fields of characteristic two, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 9,
10951104.
20. Saniga, M. (1998) On a remarkable relation between future and past over quadratic Galois fields, Chaos,
Solitons & Fractals 9, 17691771.
21. Saniga, M. (1998) Unveiling the nature of time: altered states of consciousness and pencil-generated
space-times, International Journal of Transdisciplinary Studies 2, 817.
22. Saniga, M. (1999) Geometry of psycho(patho)logical space-times: a clue to resolving the enigma of time?,
Noetic Journal 2, 265273.
23. Saniga, M. (2000) Algebraic geometry: a tool for resolving the enigma of time?, in R. Buccheri, V. Di Ges
and M. Saniga (eds.), Studies on the Structure of Time: From Physics to Psycho(patho)logy, Kluwer
Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York, pp. 137166.
24. Saniga, M. (2001) Cremona transformations and the conundrum of dimensionality and signature of macro-
spacetime, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 12, 21272142.
25. Saniga, M. (2002) On spatially anisotropic pencil-space-times associated with a quadro-cubic Cremona
transformation, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 13, 807814.
26. Saniga, M. (2002) Quadro-quartic Cremona transformations and four-dimensional pencil-space-times with the
reverse signature, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 13, 797805.
27. Cremona, L. (1871) Sulle trasformazioni razionali nello spazio, Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. II(5), 131162.
28. Hudson, H.P. (1927) Cremona Transformations in Plane and Space, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
29. Pan, I., Ronga, F., and Vust, T. (2001) Birational quadratic transformations of the three dimensional complex
projective space, Annales de lInstitut Fourier 51, 11531187.
30. Kaku, M. (1999) Introduction to Superstrings and M-theory, Springer, New York.
31. Huber, G. (1955) Akasa, der Mystische Raum, Origo Verlag, Zrich, p. 46.